Download PDF - Department of Navy Chief Information Officer - U.S. ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The U.S. Navy’s NewElectromagnetic Pulse (EMP) ProgramResurrecting the Capability in a New WorldBy Blaise Corbett and James PartakDormant for more than a decade, the U.S. Navy’s Electro -magnetic Pulse (EMP) Program is being revived through theNaval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) Office of the Directorfor Force Electromagnetic (EM) Effects and Spectrum Manage -ment. The program’s immediate goals include establishing cog -nizance about current standards for system acquisition as re -lated to EMP survivability; assisting with developing standardsand methodology to test and assess future systems; assessingthe current posture of mission critical systems with regard toEMP survivability; and coordinating with other Department ofDefense (DoD) services and entities to share EMP resources andinformation.High-Altitude Electromagnetic PulseElectromagnetic pulse is a ra -diated electromagnetic field,typically generated and as -sociated with a nucleardetonation. A nucleardevice detonated atan altitude in ex -cess of 40 milesgenerates High -Altitude Elec -t r o m a g n e t i cPulse (HEMP),which is the focusof the U.S. Navy program. This high -altitude nuclear explosioncreates high energy photons known as gamma rays. The pho -tons collide with molecules in the upper atmosphere creatingfree electrons called Compton electrons, which then interactwith the Earth’s geomagnetic field lines to create a HEMP.HEMP can be characterized as a radio frequency emissionwith broad frequency content, high electrical field levels up to100 kilovolts per meter, and high instantaneous power den -sity levels that can exceed 20 megawatts per meter squared.HEMP is composed of three components commonly re -ferred to as E1, E2 and E3.E1, often referred to as the prompt component, is charac -terized by short pulse duration and a fast rise time. The actualEMP experienced is a function of the weapon yield anddesign, burst height, latitude of the burst, andrelative observer location from theburst point.E2 is often compared tolightning in terms of dura -tion and frequency con -tent (frequencies con -tained in the signal),while E3 has thelongest duration,lowest frequencycontent, and low -est field levels.14 CHIPS www.chips.navy.mil Dedicated to Sharing Information - Technology - Experience
As such, E1 poses the greatest danger to individual elec -tronic systems, while E3 poses the greatest threat to networkedinfrastructure, such as long line power and telephone networks.The focus of the military is primarily on electronic system im -pacts due to E1.With the collapse of the Soviet Union and no perceivedthreat, the military’s investments in EMP assessment capabilitieswere significantly reduced.CBRN Survivability OversightThe late 20th century saw the emergence of tactical andstrategic nuclear capabilities by developing nations whose po -litical agendas and policies are diametrically opposed to the in -terests of the United States.In September 2008, the DoD formally established a senior -level Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear (CBRN) Surviv -ability Oversight Group (CSOG) through the mechanism of theCBRN Survivability Policy, Department of Defense Instruction(DoDI) 3150.09.The CSOG charter established its mission to ensure thatequipment survivability in a nuclear weapons effects environ -ment, including EMP, is addressed specifically by requirementsduring the acquisition process. Further, the CSOG was chargedto establish the process for evaluating legacy system vulner -abilities deployed by the services and to prepare a yearly reportto Congress about the progress toward achieving hardening ofeach service’s mission critical systems.The CBRN Survivability Policy: (1) defines a CBRN missioncritical system; (2) calls for the establishment of processes toidentify and review a mission critical system in the context of theJoint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS);(3) establishes processes for ensuring system survivability in aCBRN environment; and (4) identifies lines of responsibility forpolicy implementation.EMP Program MissionThe new U.S. Navy EMP Program mission is multifaceted butultimately comes down to providing senior Navy leadership theinformation to assess fleet posture with regard to EMP. Currentlyfour core elements comprise the new program: testing and as -sessment, guidance, surveys and standards.The U.S. Navy EMP Program supports the functions of theNAVSEA electromagnetic environmental effects (E3) technicalwarrant holder by providing guidance to Navy acquisition pro -grams relative to military standards, requirements and designpractices.It is vital that the U.S. Navy EMP Program engage programmanagers early in the acquisition process to provide guid -ance and education about the effect these requirements haveon their respective programs. The EMP Program is standingby to assist program managers with such tasks as developingand/or reviewing capability design documents and systemspecifications.The Road AheadThe road ahead for any new program is fraught with chal -lenges. The most significant challenge for the new U.S. NavyEMP Program is cognizance. Due to the long absence of a robustEMP Program, few people in the U.S. Navy or across the greaterDoD community have an intimate knowledge of EMP causesand effects. The prevailing thought appears to be that the prob -ability of occurrence is low, so the issue is not important and canbe easily dismissed.However, the risk of failing to implement a mitigation strat -egy for EMP is at the highest level, and the consequences of fail -ing to take precautions now can be catastrophic.Blaise Corbett has been with the Navy since 2002 and has beendirectly involved in the EMP assessment of naval systems since 2004.Corbett is currently the group leader for the Naval Surface WarfareCenter Dahlgren Division EMP assessment group.James Partak, an engineer originally from Naval Surface WarfareCenter White Oak, has more than 39 years of experience in the area ofnuclear effects to electronic systems. Now retired from the Navy, Jimsupports the EMP assessment group through EG&G, a division of theURS Corp.Applicable Policy• • • • • DoDI 3150.09. Chemical, Biological,Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN)Survivability Policy (Change 1). Aug. 17,2009.MIL-STD-1310G. Standard Practice forShipboard Bonding, Grounding, andOther Techniques for ElectromagneticCompatibility and Safety. June 28, 1996.MIL-PRF-24758A. PerformanceSpecification – Conduit Systems,Flexible, Weatherproof. Sept. 24, 2004.OPNAVINST 3401.3A. NuclearSurvivability of Navy and Marine CorpsSystems. Jan. 5, 1989.OPNAVINST 9070.1. Survivability Policyfor Surface Ships of the U.S. Navy. Sept.23, 1988.CHIPS January - March 2010 15
Page 8: Climate MonitoringThe Department of
Page 11 and 12: Figure 1 shows the top-down organiz
Page 13: DD Form 1494 - Application for Equi
Page 19 and 20: Figure 3.Fleet Cyber Command/U.S. 1
Page 21 and 22: standardize enterprise management a
Page 23 and 24: Sometimes combatant commanders get
Page 25 and 26: It can be embarrassing toattempt to
Page 27 and 28: The 4-inch by 4-inch magnetometerto
Page 29 and 30: Air Traffic Controller 2nd Class Th
Page 31 and 32: the next spiral evolutionary step f
Page 33 and 34: Collaboration Tools for the Federal
Page 35 and 36: Your Office Copier/Printer May Pres
Page 37 and 38: NMCI Gets Into A HotspotBy Mike Her
Page 39 and 40: the FIPS-201 standard are helping t
Page 41 and 42: cy system’s functionality to NSIP
Page 43 and 44: starts spreading through my network
Page 45 and 46: Enterprise Software AgreementsThe E
Page 47 and 48: NetIQNetIQ - Provides Net IQ system
Page 49 and 50: Web Link: http://www.it-umbrella.na
Page 51 and 52: Page intentionally left blankCHIPS

Download PDF - Department of Navy Chief Information Officer - U.S. ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?